Can any mythicist produce evidence from primary sources supporting their claims? It’s interesting that mythicists like to rattle off a list of deities born on DEC 25th. Can they produce information from a primary source backing that up? The Bible, for example, says nothing about when Jesus was born. The main concern seems to be where rather than when.
As for Dying and Rising gods. Paul complains that this concept is a “stumbling block” for Jewish conversion Carrier and he is referred to as a babbler and said to be talking about “foreign gods” Didn’t these Greek thinkers know about Dionysus et al? Were they unfamiliar with their own religions?
A good point. The mythicist view of other religious traditions is straight out of the nineteenth century. Seeing other middle & near eastern religions as precursors or analogues of Christianity is a product of the mindset that looks at these traditions through the lens of Christianity. Not the other way around. Anthropologists and sociologists spent most of the twentieth century trying to undo this way of thinking and see these other traditions on their own terms. The whole “dying and rising god” trope is largely a fantasy. All religions are not the same and they disagree as much if not more than they agree. Which is not to say they don’t influence each other or borrow from each other. But Jesus is not the same as Osiris.
spiker said
Can any mythicist produce evidence from primary sources supporting their claims? It’s interesting that mythicists like to rattle off a list of deities born on DEC 25th. Can they produce information from a primary source backing that up? The Bible, for example, says nothing about when Jesus was born. The main concern seems to be where rather than when.As for Dying and Rising gods. Paul complains that this concept is a “stumbling block” for Jewish conversion Carrier and he is referred to as a babbler and said to be talking about “foreign gods” Didn’t these Greek thinkers know about Dionysus et al? Were they unfamiliar with their own religions?
I vote for a section dedicated to them, where they can gather preach to their hearts content.
MMahmud said
spiker said
Can any mythicist produce evidence from primary sources supporting their claims? It’s interesting that mythicists like to rattle off a list of deities born on DEC 25th. Can they produce information from a primary source backing that up? The Bible, for example, says nothing about when Jesus was born. The main concern seems to be where rather than when.As for Dying and Rising gods. Paul complains that this concept is a “stumbling block” for Jewish conversion Carrier and he is referred to as a babbler and said to be talking about “foreign gods” Didn’t these Greek thinkers know about Dionysus et al? Were they unfamiliar with their own religions?
I vote for a section dedicated to them, where they can gather preach to their hearts content.
What does that accomplish?
spiker said
MMahmud said
spiker said
Can any mythicist produce evidence from primary sources supporting their claims? It’s interesting that mythicists like to rattle off a list of deities born on DEC 25th. Can they produce information from a primary source backing that up? The Bible, for example, says nothing about when Jesus was born. The main concern seems to be where rather than when.As for Dying and Rising gods. Paul complains that this concept is a “stumbling block” for Jewish conversion Carrier and he is referred to as a babbler and said to be talking about “foreign gods” Didn’t these Greek thinkers know about Dionysus et al? Were they unfamiliar with their own religions?
I vote for a section dedicated to them, where they can gather preach to their hearts content.
What does that accomplish?
cleaner threads everywhere else
“I vote for a section dedicated to them, where they can gather preach to their hearts content.”
Instead, isn’t there a way we can block out posters’ comments we are uninterested in reading? I’m not sure how to do it but have read here on the blog that it’s set up for us to be able to do that.
Judith said
“I vote for a section dedicated to them, where they can gather preach to their hearts content.”Instead, isn’t there a way we can block out posters’ comments we are uninterested in reading? I’m not sure how to do it but have read here on the blog that it’s set up for us to be able to do that.
Hmmmm… couldn’t one just ignore comments, we don’t like?
spiker said
MMahmud said
cleaner threads everywhere elseCleaner in what sense? Cleaner in the sense you might set your eyes on the wrong thought for a few seconds?
My understanding was, this forum is about “what can be affirmed about Early Christianity” via the historical method.
So, theological debates like “whether the resurrection happened” are not within the scope of history. What a historian will do, whether he is atheist or Chrisitian is claim that what can be historically affirmed with a high degree of probability, is that early Christians claimed to have visions of a revived Messiah.
Is history absolutely certain? Of course not. Does a historian have the last word on what actually happened in the past? No, it could be that the historical method was used correctly and despite that, for one reason or another, what the scholar affirmed of the past via the method turned out to be wrong.
So while theological debates and truth judgments are outside the scope of a historical discussion, mythicism is literally a rejection of the historical method itself.
An non Christian scholar can have a historical discussion or debate about early Christianity and keep the theological aspect neutral(Ehrman’s discussion of veridical vs. non veridical visions in How Jesus Became God) is a perfect example.
But when arguing with a mythicist, one is not discussing history, but whether the historical method scholars like Bart use is valid in the first place.
Now that, like theological debates has it’s place. However it’s not history discussion but a discussion of the subject of history itself.
MMahmud said
My understanding was, this forum is about “what can be affirmed about Early Christianity” via the historical method.
I think you are giving waay too much credit for what the forum should be about.
I like your point about mythicism being a rejection of the historical method.
I think it can be safely argued that it’s also a rejection of crtical thinking;
however,speaking for myself I’m entirely open to an actual argument, but don’t hold out much hope. I don’t really expect much from Price when he and Ehrman debate. While Price is brilliant, I don’t think his arguments are persuasive to anyone other than mythicists. BUT the question remains, how many mythicists are even out here holding forth? I doubt there are even 3.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)